Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The golden cue

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Nomination withdrawn default to keep JForget 23:24, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The golden cue

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Only one reference to it, nothing else. Fails WP:N Buggie111 (talk) 21:11, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The source that it cites is reliable (from the Times Union (Albany)). A quick Google search also turned up another article [1] from the Odessa American. Seems to fit WP:N, although it could use expansion and a WP:Move to fix the capitalization. GorillaWarfare ^talk 21:24, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wow, the only pool hall in Albany! two articles does not notability make. Stub created by SPA, possible WP:COI Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 22:53, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:notability. On a side note, what's up with the big image of a disected fish in the article?--White Shadows ^{you're breaking up} 23:17, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

USer must of thought it was a picof the inside of the hall. Buggie111 (talk) 23:25, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The FISH IS GONE. I had to hotlink to my own domain as I can not yet upload images as my account is less than ten days old. I will continue adding what I think makes the establish notable such as hosting league play and at times having national caliper players, and lasting 42+ years in an difficult economic area. Thank you for your tolerance of my learning curve.. The Hall now has a web presence that shows up in the top several results on bing and google. Give me time and my account will expand beyond an SPA as I have expertise in several areas, and will hopefully shortly will have degrees in several areas. As it is my time is limited, and am working on my first entry.. I hope to make contributions to the areas of Psychology, Philosophy, Computer Science, Engineering, Ethics, Music, and Pharmacoloy / Psychopharmacoloy... if I dare. :) I must admit, for a while a stinking, dissected fish was fitting for my efforts, though not what was intended. John VanDerwerken 10:11, 2 May 2010 (UTC) John VanDerwerken

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:58, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:58, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:50, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Two articles (the one cited in the article isn't really an article on the pool hall anyway) is not enough to make this place notable. Drmies (talk) 03:23, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Two articles is what WP:N calls for. I have not actually looked at the sources so don't consider this an endorsement. But if Drmies and Ohconfucius feels that the two articles are reliable and nontrivial I question how they can claim non-notability. Taemyr (talk) 15:39, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Eh, WP:N is a lot more specific than "two articles." My feelings aside, I think that the two articles cited (here and in the article) do not add up to enough significant coverage to warrant inclusion. Actually looking at sources reveals that a simple "two articles and you're in" is not a good enough guideline. Cyclopia, I'd like to hear more specifics about how this meets our requirements. Drmies (talk) 00:56, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - There are two sources which directly and prominently address the subject, from the title onwards. For me, this is enough significant coverage to meet WP:GNG requirements. --Cyclopia ^talk 10:25, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Meets WP:GNG and that's enough for keeping. --Cyclopia ^talk 22:45, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I must say I'm suprised at the results here. I apologize for any mistakes I have made during this period. Buggie111 (talk) 22:48, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? --Cyclopia ^talk 00:25, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I really thought it would be a delete consensus. And this is my only failed CSD. Buggie111 (talk) 00:28, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete While, as I point out above two sources is sufficient, I don't see two independent non trivial sources here. The timesunion link is non-trivial and indpendent, but the remainind three sources is either not indpendent (goldencue.net, and the greater albany pool league) or merely mentions the golden cue in passing (nycgrind). Other sources ala the timesunion might exist though. Taemyr (talk) 10:19, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Weak keep: I've cleaned up the article a bit (though have not found and added any additional sources). It has two clearly reliable, independent sources, one definitely non-trivial coverage, the other arguable. I don't want to create a precedent for keeping articles on every random pool/billiard hall in the world, but we actually do not have nearly enough articles on notable cue sports venues (there's not even a category for it yet, though there may be enough articles like Crucible Theatre to make one if I get around to it). My "keep" is weak because WP:Notability's general notability guideline is only marginally satisfied, and I'm not convinced that this particular venue is genuinely notable (nor that it definitely isn't). My main concern is that I do not want to see a precedent established that pool/billiard/snooker hall articles get axed out of hand simply because they are what they are. They need to be examined on a case by case basis carefully just like a biography or an article on a novel or whatever. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 00:18, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It was trivial to find (and a lot of work to integrate) more sources. There are 19 now (i.e. the article is very different now). The pool hall is clearly significant, and is a major venue for the Joss Tour (which doesn't have an article yet, but badly needs one, being one of the most important annual event series in pool) and the home of the Northeast 9-Ball Open (which should also have an article at some point; it sounds regional, but is not). Obviously passes WP:Notability's general notability guideline (GNG) with these additional sources added. The Golden Cue has been referred to as "famed" (I couldn't think of a good way to integrate that into the article without being heavy-handed, but it's in one of the cited sources). NB: The claim that the NYCGrind article is just a trivial passing mention is quite false. Both of the original independent sources cited went into quite a bit of detail about the venue, as do most of the newly added sources. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(^Õل^ō)ˀ Contribs. 06:49, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as article meets the criteria of WP:V and WP:N. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 11:51, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
'Withdraw nomination and hope that it qualifies as a DYK. Statement said. Buggie111 (talk) 02:56, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.